DEFENDANTS’ DID NOT DEMONSTRATE AS A MATTER OF LAW THAT THE ASSUMPTION OF THE RISK DOCTRINE APPLIED TO PLAINTIFF’S USE OF DEFENDANTS’ HOVER BOARD IN DEFENDANTS’ DRIVEWAY; DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN THIS SLIP AND FALL CASE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED (SECOND DEPT).
The Second Department, reversing Supreme Court, determined defendants did not demonstrate as a matter of law that the assumption of the risk doctrine applied to plaintiff’s use of defendants’ hover board in defendants’ driveway. Plaintiff was injured falling off the hover board: Under the doctrine of primary assumption of risk, a voluntary participant in a sporting or […]
